Gothamite Posted August 11, 2014 Share Posted August 11, 2014 That would involve the MLS being popularWeren't we finally working our way past the silly smack-talk? The Green Bay Packers Uniform Database! Now in a handy blog. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
illwauk Posted August 11, 2014 Share Posted August 11, 2014 The only thing I can think to accurately compare your point to is MLS. Did a significant number of gamers in the Seattle-Tacoma area ditch their Playstations for X-Boxes when the latter became the Sounders' shirt sponsor?That would involve the MLS being popularMLS is a lot more popular in the Pacific Northwest than NASCAR, which doesn't even hold any races in the region.Without sponsorship, NASCAR may as well be you and me racing our cars around a parking lot. NASCAR fans love their sport. They understand that supporting the sponsors of their sport will keep their sport around. Why does that automatically make them idiots? And I'm not talking about buying the entire the Dale Jr. collection at Wal-Mart. I'm talking about choosing Tide over Yee Haw, etc. As I said before, driver merchandise deals are made by the individual teams. NASCAR has nothing to do with that. My point was that, by supporting sponsors, NASCAR fans contribute to the health of their sport. They aren't being duped, they fully understand exactly what they're doing. Frankly, I think that's more honest than you or me trying to convince people that we aren't doing exactly the same thing every time we open a can of Coke or buy a pair of Nike sneakers. EDIT: There are plenty of examples of NASCAR fans not supporting a sponsor because the quality of the product was subpar. Support isn't "automatic." The sponsor still has to deliver. There are just as many stories about failed sponsorship (like the Army and National Guard) as there are success stories. Again, if you would like to see how it really works, read 200 MPH Billboard. Or I suppose you can continue to believe the stereotypes without any evidence to support your position. I'm still not sure how what you're saying is any different from what I said. I'm fully aware that there's a significant amount of NASCAR fans that don't fit the stereotypes; but the ones who are still exist, and they tend to be the loudest, most passionate, and thus, most visible supporters of the sport.I mean, come on... you're talking to a Packers fan who went to college, doesn't hunt, prefers urban living to the country, and has spent a fair amount of time outside of Wisconsin. I get as annoyed as anyone when Packers fans are pigeonholed as obese alcoholics who know nothing of the world outside of the northwoods, but I'm not about to act like such fans don't exist at all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mac the Knife Posted August 11, 2014 Share Posted August 11, 2014 But if you mean that includes some "unrelated" intent (like he was accelerating to get around a curve or something) then I'd disagree. I don't know anything about motor sports so I am not smart enough to know whether he could sell the court that he was accellerating for some unrelated reason, but it strikes me that his intent in accelerating could be hard to prove.No, I don't mean "unrelated intent," but period. His intent will not matter in terms of guilt or innocence under the law (and it really won't matter in a civil case); if acceleration is proved, it merely changes the degree of the offense committed. If I have a pistol pointed at you and it goes off, it matters not whether I pulled the trigger or the gun somehow went off by accident, it matters not whether I intended to shoot or whether my intent was simply to scare you or detain you. The only question is whether I'm guilty of murder, voluntary manslaughter, involuntary manslaughter, or unlawful discharge of a firearm. No matter the intent, I'm guilty of one of those. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wonderbread Posted August 11, 2014 Share Posted August 11, 2014 An accelerator on a car is very different from a trigger on a gun, you use the throttle to drive and steer those types of cars so it only makes sense for him to use it, you dont use a trigger to aim a gun, you point your barrel at only things you intend to kill or destroy, and make sure there is nothing you dont intend to shoot Infront of, behind, and anywhere near what you intend to shoot, at which point you take the gun off safe, if it has one and pull the trigger, there are a few other things to make you more accurate but I wont get into that. So in summary a throttle is used to drive a car, a trigger is only used to kill or destroy something. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JackieMoon Posted August 11, 2014 Share Posted August 11, 2014 This incident reminds me of what happened in Cincinnati last year. Two drivers got into a road rage. One cut off the other one and stopped in front of him on a major highway. The driver who cut off the other driver got out of his car and proceeded towards the other car (that was cut off). Needless to say the "raged" driver was struck by a passing truck going 65 mph and I do believe he died.I watched the video twice and could not make out what happened exactly.My opinion is two hot-heads crossed paths and one was accidently killed. I think Stewart saw him acting like an idiot and tried to intimidate him. When he realized the moron wasn't going to move, he tried to swerve out of the way and hit him with his back tire. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PSUcelticsWON95 Posted August 11, 2014 Share Posted August 11, 2014 Latest update, I believe. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rams80 Posted August 12, 2014 Share Posted August 12, 2014 An accelerator on a car is very different from a trigger on a gun, you use the throttle to drive and steer those types of cars so it only makes sense for him to use it, you dont use a trigger to aim a gun, you point your barrel at only things you intend to kill or destroy, and make sure there is nothing you dont intend to shoot Infront of, behind, and anywhere near what you intend to shoot, at which point you take the gun off safe, if it has one and pull the trigger, there are a few other things to make you more accurate but I wont get into that. So in summary a throttle is used to drive a car, a trigger is only used to kill or destroy something. If Stewart took any action driving the car that acknowledged Ware's presence, he's guilty of negligence or reckless driving at minimum. The only Stewart gets off scott-free is if he says he never, ever saw Ware or heard he was in the area over the radio. On 8/1/2010 at 4:01 PM, winters in buffalo said: You manage to balance agitation with just enough salient points to keep things interesting. Kind of a low-rent DG_Now. On 1/2/2011 at 9:07 PM, Sodboy13 said: Today, we are all otaku. "The city of Peoria was once the site of the largest distillery in the world and later became the site for mass production of penicillin. So it is safe to assume that present-day Peorians are descended from syphilitic boozehounds."-Stephen Colbert POTD: February 15, 2010, June 20, 2010 The Glorious Bloom State Penguins (NCFAF) 2014: 2-9, 2015: 7-5 (L Pineapple Bowl), 2016: 1-0 (NCFAB) 2014-15: 10-8, 2015-16: 14-5 (SMC Champs, L 1st Round February Frenzy) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TalktoChuck Posted August 12, 2014 Share Posted August 12, 2014 An accelerator on a car is very different from a trigger on a gun, you use the throttle to drive and steer those types of cars so it only makes sense for him to use it, you dont use a trigger to aim a gun, you point your barrel at only things you intend to kill or destroy, and make sure there is nothing you dont intend to shoot Infront of, behind, and anywhere near what you intend to shoot, at which point you take the gun off safe, if it has one and pull the trigger, there are a few other things to make you more accurate but I wont get into that. So in summary a throttle is used to drive a car, a trigger is only used to kill or destroy something.If Stewart took any action driving the car that acknowledged Ware's presence, he's guilty of negligence or reckless driving at minimum.The only Stewart gets off scott-free is if he says he never, ever saw Ware or heard he was in the area over the radio.He is definitely guilty of negligence any way you slice it. But, I think thats about all that he is guilty of, unless they can prove intent.The gun analogy doesn't really work, because Stewart did not put Ward in harms way. Ward placed himself in that dangerous situation. A more appropriate analogy would be if I were to forcibly put the gun in your hand and then it goes off on me during the exchange.Getting out of the car is stupid in and of itself, but then proceeding to walk in front of oncoming traffic is even more stupid. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cosmic Posted August 12, 2014 Share Posted August 12, 2014 An accelerator on a car is very different from a trigger on a gun, you use the throttle to drive and steer those types of cars so it only makes sense for him to use it, you dont use a trigger to aim a gun, you point your barrel at only things you intend to kill or destroy, and make sure there is nothing you dont intend to shoot Infront of, behind, and anywhere near what you intend to shoot, at which point you take the gun off safe, if it has one and pull the trigger, there are a few other things to make you more accurate but I wont get into that. So in summary a throttle is used to drive a car, a trigger is only used to kill or destroy something.If Stewart took any action driving the car that acknowledged Ware's presence, he's guilty of negligence or reckless driving at minimum.The only Stewart gets off scott-free is if he says he never, ever saw Ware or heard he was in the area over the radio.He is definitely guilty of negligence any way you slice it. But, I think thats about all that he is guilty of, unless they can prove intent.The gun analogy doesn't really work, because Stewart did not put Ward in harms way. Ward placed himself in that dangerous situation. A more appropriate analogy would be if I were to forcibly put the gun in your hand and then it goes off on me during the exchange.Getting out of the car is stupid in and of itself, but then proceeding to walk in front of oncoming traffic is even more stupid.We don't know anything about what he saw or when, so I'm not sure how he's "definitely" guilty of something. He didn't seem to be far out of line from the blue car in front of him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
McCall Posted August 12, 2014 Share Posted August 12, 2014 Everybody was accelerating because that's what cars do and in that situation of coming around the curve, all cars were doing just that. Doing so is not an acknowledgement that he saw Ward nor that he intended to hit him. As was mentioned the guy driving the car in front of Stewart barely saw him in time to miss him and barely did. Stewart is not responsible if he did everything normal and some guy being an idiot stepped out in front of him. It's called an a-c-c-i-d-e-n-t. How can Stewart be held to blame if he did nothing out of the ordinary? The guy running out into the middle of the race was out of the ordinary. Some here aren't looking for the truth or answers, but rather someone to blame. Accidents happen. This one, it appears from the evidence we have, happened because a guy did something stupid. Just because he's gone, doesn't mean someone else has take the blame. https://dribbble.com/MakaioCall Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PSUcelticsWON95 Posted August 12, 2014 Share Posted August 12, 2014 Everybody was accelerating because that's what cars do and in that situation of coming around the curve, all cars were doing just that. Doing so is not an acknowledgement that he saw Ward nor that he intended to hit him. As was mentioned the guy driving the car in front of Stewart barely saw him in time to miss him and barely did. Stewart is not responsible if he did everything normal and some guy being an idiot stepped out in front of him. It's called an a-c-c-i-d-e-n-t. How can Stewart be held to blame if he did nothing out of the ordinary? The guy running out into the middle of the race was out of the ordinary. Some here aren't looking for the truth or answers, but rather someone to blame. Accidents happen. This one, it appears from the evidence we have, happened because a guy did something stupid. Just because he's gone, doesn't mean someone else has take the blame.This. It was just an accident. No one needs to be blamed. I was never trying to blame Ward, I'm just trying to defend Stewart. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Admiral Posted August 12, 2014 Share Posted August 12, 2014 People with cars or car numbers in their avatars have shown a certain zeal for defending Stewart. Feelin' a real us/them mentality up in here. ♫ oh yeah, board goes on, long after the thrill of postin' is gone ♫ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cosmic Posted August 12, 2014 Share Posted August 12, 2014 I feel myself coming down on Stewart's side based on my gut reaction to the video, and I've never watched more than five minutes of any automobile race in my life. I am a professional driver, though.I think most of us, ultimately, just want the truth to come out and justice to be served. I have a feeling we'll never really know what happened, though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gothamite Posted August 12, 2014 Share Posted August 12, 2014 Not unless Stewart ever feels like talking. Or is required to allocute. The Green Bay Packers Uniform Database! Now in a handy blog. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
infrared41 Posted August 12, 2014 Share Posted August 12, 2014 I'm still not sure how what you're saying is any different from what I said. I'm fully aware that there's a significant amount of NASCAR fans that don't fit the stereotypes; but the ones who are still exist, and they tend to be the loudest, most passionate, and thus, most visible supporters of the sport.I mean, come on... you're talking to a Packers fan who went to college, doesn't hunt, prefers urban living to the country, and has spent a fair amount of time outside of Wisconsin. I get as annoyed as anyone when Packers fans are pigeonholed as obese alcoholics who know nothing of the world outside of the northwoods, but I'm not about to act like such fans don't exist at all.Honestly, I'm not sure we were ever talking about the same thing. All I was trying to do was explain that NASCAR fans support NASCAR sponsors for reasons other than "just because" and that they aren't all just a bunch of idiots being duped into spending all their money on the Dale Jr. Fall Collection. In trying to explain why NASCAR fans are brand loyal, etc., I seem to have given you the impression that I'm trying to convince you that there are no rednecks in NASCAR. I've been the Coca-Cola 600. Believe me, I've seen my share of NASCAR rednecks.This much I do know, we've gone in more circles than the night race at Bristol. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OMMF Posted August 12, 2014 Share Posted August 12, 2014 An accelerator on a car is very different from a trigger on a gun, you use the throttle to drive and steer those types of cars so it only makes sense for him to use it, you dont use a trigger to aim a gun, you point your barrel at only things you intend to kill or destroy, and make sure there is nothing you dont intend to shoot Infront of, behind, and anywhere near what you intend to shoot, at which point you take the gun off safe, if it has one and pull the trigger, there are a few other things to make you more accurate but I wont get into that. So in summary a throttle is used to drive a car, a trigger is only used to kill or destroy something.If Stewart took any action driving the car that acknowledged Ware's presence, he's guilty of negligence or reckless driving at minimum.The only Stewart gets off scott-free is if he says he never, ever saw Ware or heard he was in the area over the radio.The sport is built on reckless driving. It seems it would be hard to differentiate between what's part of the race and what isn't.Speaking of, that's why you can't try to apply societal laws as a blanket over sports. Things done as part of a sporting event are sometimes outside the law but, as willing participants, athletes accept the responsibility that comes with that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DG_ThenNowForever Posted August 12, 2014 Share Posted August 12, 2014 It's why no one ever calls the cops during WWE RAW.(Well, except when they do and that doesn't make much sense!) 1 hour ago, ShutUpLutz! said: and the drunken doodoobags jumping off the tops of SUV's/vans/RV's onto tables because, oh yeah, they are drunken drug abusing doodoobags Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OMMF Posted August 12, 2014 Share Posted August 12, 2014 It's why no one ever calls the cops during WWE RAW.(Well, except when they do and that doesn't make much sense!)But while you have the police on the phone, tell them that for $9.99/mo, they can see all the pay per views for the rest of the year! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
infrared41 Posted August 12, 2014 Share Posted August 12, 2014 Food for thought... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BBTV Posted August 12, 2014 Share Posted August 12, 2014 It's why no one ever calls the cops during WWE RAW.(Well, except when they do and that doesn't make much sense!)But while you have the police on the phone, tell them that for $9.99/mo, they can see all the pay per views for the rest of the year!"Hello, police? There's a crime being committed RIGHT NOW""OK sir, can you provide us with details?""No, but for only $9.99 / month (with a 6 month committment) you can actually witness it and 6 months of future crimes! Plus decades of footage of old crimes."3 weeks later, Kane is arrested for his role in Katie Vick's death. "The views expressed here are mine and do not reflect the official opinion of my employer or the organization through which the Internet was accessed." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.